The double portrait coins of Antiochus XI andPhilip I : a seleucid mint at Beroea?

Autor(en): Houghton, Arthur

Objekttyp: Article

Zeitschrift: Schweizerische numismatische Rundschau = Revue suisse denumismatique = Rivista svizzera di numismatica

Band (Jahr): 66 (1987)

Persistenter Link: http://dx.doi.org/10.5169/seals-175042

PDF erstellt am: 21.07.2016

NutzungsbedingungenDie ETH-Bibliothek ist Anbieterin der digitalisierten Zeitschriften. Sie besitzt keine Urheberrechte anden Inhalten der Zeitschriften. Die Rechte liegen in der Regel bei den Herausgebern.Die auf der Plattform e-periodica veröffentlichten Dokumente stehen für nicht-kommerzielle Zwecke inLehre und Forschung sowie für die private Nutzung frei zur Verfügung. Einzelne Dateien oderAusdrucke aus diesem Angebot können zusammen mit diesen Nutzungsbedingungen und denkorrekten Herkunftsbezeichnungen weitergegeben werden.Das Veröffentlichen von Bildern in Print- und Online-Publikationen ist nur mit vorheriger Genehmigungder Rechteinhaber erlaubt. Die systematische Speicherung von Teilen des elektronischen Angebotsauf anderen Servern bedarf ebenfalls des schriftlichen Einverständnisses der Rechteinhaber.

HaftungsausschlussAlle Angaben erfolgen ohne Gewähr für Vollständigkeit oder Richtigkeit. Es wird keine Haftungübernommen für Schäden durch die Verwendung von Informationen aus diesem Online-Angebot oderdurch das Fehlen von Informationen. Dies gilt auch für Inhalte Dritter, die über dieses Angebotzugänglich sind.

Ein Dienst der ETH-BibliothekETH Zürich, Rämistrasse 101, 8092 Zürich, Schweiz, www.library.ethz.ch

http://www.e-periodica.ch

ARTHUR HOUGHTON*

THE DOUBLE PORTRAIT COINSOF ANTIOCHUS XI AND PHILIP I:

A SELEUCID MINT AT BEROEA?

In 94 B.C. Seleucus VI, eldest son ofAntiochus VIII Grypus, was driven from Antiochby his cousin Antiochus X Eusebes, and fled to Mopsus in Cilicia, where he was killed '.Antiochus XI and Philip, Seleucus' younger twin brothers, immediately sought to avengehis death. They first sacked Mopsus then, early in 93 B.C., seized Antioch from Eusebes.

Antiochus XI, now called Epiphanes, reigned adone at the Seleucid capital for somemonths, until Eusebes returned in the summer or autumn of the same year to reclaim theSeleucid capital2. Following a disastrous defeat in a pitched fight with Eusebes, AntiochusEpiphanes was drowned in the Orontes River while fleeing the field of battle. Philip re¬

mained in northern Syria, first allying himself with yet another brother, Demetrius (III)Eucaerus, against Eusebes, and eventually seizing Antioch himself in 88 or 87 B.C.

At some point shortly after the death of Seleucus VI, Antiochus XI and Philip initiateda series of tetradrachms showing on the obverse the accolate portraits of both kings and aseated Zeus Nikephoros on the reverse. The number currently known is not large:

Catalogue

Group I (Beroea?)

Obv. conjoined, diademed heads of Antiochus XI and Philip I to r.; fillet border.Rev. BAEIAEQE ANTIOXOY KAI BAEIAEQE «DIAinnOY Zeus seated 1. on throne

without back, holding Nike in outstretched r. hand and resting 1. on long scepter;to 1., vertically,C^LUA; laurel wreath border.

* I am grateful to I. Carradice, M. Doyen, D. Gerin, S. Hurter, J. Lallemand, H.-D. Schultz,A. Spaer and N. Waggoner for their help to me during the preparation of this article, and to G. LeRider for having read it in draft. I remain indebted to Francis Campbell for his continued thought¬ful assistance to my many needs in the library of the American Numismatic Society.

Babelon E. Babelon, Les rois de Syrie, d'Arménie et de Commagène (Paris, 1890)Bellinger A.R. Bellinger, The end of the Seleucids, Transactions of the Connecticut Academy of

Arts and Science 38, 1948CSE A. Houghton, Coins of the Seleucid empire (New York, 1983)LSM E.T. Newell, Late Seleucid mints at Ake-Ptolemais and Damascus, NNM 84, 1939SMA E.T. Newell, The Seleucid mint ofAntioch, AJN 57, 1917-1918WSM E.T. Newell, The coinage of the Western Seleucid mints, from Seleucus I to Antiochus

III, ANSNS 4, 1941

1 Josephus, Ant. XIII, 13.4 (368); Appian, Syr. 69; Eusebius, 259-262. Bellinger, 74, attemptsto reconcile the conflicting versions of Seleucus' death.

2 Bellinger, 92, agrees with the chronology of Newell, SMA, pp. 115-7. D.B.Waage, Antioch-on-the-Orontes, Vol. 4, Part 2: Greek, Roman, Byzantine and Crusaders' coins (Princeton, 1952),p. 23, perhaps following Babelon, clxvii, prefers a date for the reign ofAntiochus XI of92 B.C. ThatAntiochus was able to hold Antioch for at least several months seems likely from the fact that at leastthree dies were used to strike his coins at the capital city: CSE p. 24; Bellinger 74, n. 72.

79

Tetradrachms1 Al PI t 15.59 Rev. the initial letter is €. Berlin, Staatliche Museen.

J. Friedländer, ZfN 7, 1880, 224fl, pl. 4, 2. (Fig. 1)

Rev. as no. 1, but beneath throne, A2 Al P2 15.29 Paris, BN; Babelon 1540 («15.40 g»). Ex Revil coll.

(Paris, 1845). (Fig. 2)3 A2 P3 t 14.53 Rev. 1. field monograms off flan. Jerusalem, A. Spaer

coll.; CSE 589. Said to come from Gaziantep, 1964.

(Fig. 3)4 A2 P3 t 13.40 London, BM. British Museum Ocasional Paper no.

25, 1981: Coins and Medals. New Acquisitions, No. 1

(1976-77), 216.

5 A3 P4 t 14.15 Palo Alto, W Wahler coll. Leu 20, 1978, 166; Jameson,no. 1761; Hirsch 25, 1909 (Philipsen), 2942. (Fig. 4)

6 A3 P5 / 15.23 New York, ANS. Hess-Leu, 24 Mar. 1959, 296. Fromor through Lebanon, 1958. (Fig. 5)

Group II (Uncertain Mint in Cilicia?)Obv. as Group IRev. type as Group I, but throne has high back; to 1., NC ; beneath throne, A

ATetradrachm7 A4 P6 / 15.66 Brussels, BN. P. Naster, La collection Lucien de

Hirsch (Brussels, 1959), no. 1728. (Fig. 6)

Sequence of Coins and Chronology

The sequence ofcoins ofGroup I is indicated by the development of the facial hair on the

portrait ofAntiochus XI, from the sideburns ofAl and A2, to the light beard which coversthe point of the chin on A3. A2 and A3 are linked by reverses which include, in addition tothe letters in the left field, a small A beneath the throne. This letter is absent from thereverse of coin no. 1, which is almost certainly the earliest of the group, and its obverse die,Al, the first of the series. Al, moreover, which was evidently the work of a master artist, is

qualitatively the finest of the group and conforms to what one might expect of the first dieof an important propaganda issue. The later dies of Group I (A2 and A3) are more pedes¬

trian by comparison, still fine examples of the same engraver's work but without the senseof life or character he gave his first and best product. The Brussels tetradrachm is quitedifferent from the issues of Group I and was likely struck at a different mint (below).

The double portrait coins of Group I cannot be from Antioch3. Their issuance musthave begun before Antiochus and Philip defeated Eusebes and seized the Seleucid capital,following the death of Seleucus VI in 94 B.C., while the two brothers prepared for theircoming military campaign. Bellinger suggests that the coinage was not continued beyondthe advent of Antiochus' reign at Antioch4. Yet the appearance on nos. 5 and 6 of a light

3 SMA, p. 117. To Newell's observation of the stylistic variance between these issues and coins ofthe regular Antiochene series, one may add other differences, including their monograms andstriking technique.

4 Bellinger, 92.

80

beard on Philip's chin - a reasonable but unrealistic extension ofhis known features (it ap¬

pears on no other known coin of Philip) - indicates that at least obverse die A3 was cutwhen the two brothers were no longer accessible to the engraver, almost certainly because

they had left the issuing city for Antioch. It also raises the possibility that these coins werestruck for some period after Antioch was taken, and perhaps even until Antiochus' death

toward the latter part of 93 B.C.

Issuing Mint(s)

On the basis of the three coins known to him (the Berlin, Paris and Palo Alto examples),Bellinger believed that the double portrait tetradrachms of Antiochus and Philip were is¬

sued by a single mint in the Syrian north, perhaps at a coastal city, which Philip retained as

his principal base when Antiochus installed himself at the Seleucid capital5. The materialcurrently known, however, indicates that two mints were involved in their production.Despite their typological similarity, the differences between the Group I tetradrachms andthe single example of Group II in Brussels are pronounced, by style, iconography (thethrone back), and by the indicative letters or monograms carried on their reverses. Withinthe coinage produced under the Seleucid kings, one normally expects to find some com¬

mon link between issues of a single mint struck over a brief period of time, in this instance

perhaps somewhat more than a year. Yet except for typological similarity, there is no com¬

monality between Groups I and II, and it seems almost certain that the Brussels

tetradrachm, a copyist's product apparently based on the first coins of Group I, was struckat a location different from nos. 1-6.

A north Syrian city would be fully appropriate as the origin of the Group I coins. Bel¬

linger's suggestion ofa location on the coast is reasonable, but the very fragmentary historyof the period may hold a more specific clue. Josephus records Philip as having ruled over atleast part of Syria, following Antiochus XI Epiphanes' death6. Philip's younger brother,Demetrius III Eucaerus, came to his assistance for a time, but after defeating Eusebes keptPhilip from Antioch while he occupied the Seleucid capital himself. What Philip then didis not recorded, but it seems likely that he would have abandoned his alliance with De¬

metrius and sought refuge, or at least a base of support, probably in north Syria since the

area from Antioch to Damascus was under Demetrius' control. About 88 B.C., after inflict¬ing a major defeat at Shechem on the rebellious Jewish leader, Alexander Jannaeus, De¬

metrius turned on Philip and confronted him with a large force at Beroea, modernAleppo7. Philip prevailed with the aid ofBeroea's ruler («TÛpavvoç»), Straton, and the Par¬

thian governor (ofMesopotamia?), Mithradates Sinakes. Demetrius was sent into captivi¬

ty among the Parthians and is said to have died of illness. Philip moved to take Antioch forhimself, and occupied the city late in 88 or early in 87 B.C.8.

5 Bellinger, 93.6 Josephus, Ant. XIII, 369, says that Philip «put on the diadem» after Antiochus was killed, but

the coins are clear that he reigned jointly with Antiochus as king before Eusebes was forced fromAntioch.

7 Josephus, Ant. XIII, 384.8 Josephus, Ant. XIII, 386, says Philip marched on Antioch immediately after his battle with

Demetrius, but it is unclear as to when he seized the city. Demetrius' known coins ofDamascus, hisown capital, end with a short issue of S.E. 225 (88-7 B.C.: LSM 130); the earliest recorded coin ofAntiochus XII, who immediately succeeded Demetrius, is dated S.E. 226 (87-6 B.C.: LSM 132).

81

This historical fragment provided by Josephus, however small, indicates that at least atBeroea, Philip had friends and material assistance. It also leaves open the possibility thatthese may have been in place for some time, perhaps since the period when he and hisbrother had consolidated their political and military support against Eusebes.

Could Beroea have been their principal base of operations in 94-93 B.C.? If so, it wouldlikely have been the location where the Group I issues were struck. The record is, unfor¬

tunately, circumstantial, as is all other evidence. There is no archaeology of Beroea whichmight be helpful, and the known provenances of the coins hold no particular clue. The in¬

dicative letters of the Group I coins do not link with those on other known series, moreover,and are therefore of no help in locating their originating mint9.

The issuing city of no. 7 is also unknown, but a general indication of origin may be

provided by its left field monogram, N< The monogram, the combination of N and K,probably represented a magistrate with Niko- or Nike- as a combining name. Despite its

simplicity, it nevertheless appears only rarely on Seleucid coins. It occurs on issues ofTar¬

sus; on coins of an unknown but related Cilician mint operating in the third and early se¬

cond centuries B.C.; and on the earliest issues of Seleucia on the Calycadnus, struck un¬der Antiochus III and Seleucus IV10. It appears later on certain issues of Demetrius I ofCilician origin11; and on coins of Antiochus IX struck at Tarsus and another mint12.Finally, the N< monogram occurs in combination with A and A, A or A beneath thethrone of Zeus, on tetradrachms of Philip I likely struck at the same mint as the Brusselstetradrachm (no. 7), but certainly later13. Significantly, four Philips have appeared in a

recently discovered small hoard now in the Adana Museum, Turkey, apparently un¬earthed in the vicinity ofAdana itself. The findspot of the hoard, which is to be publishedseparately, cannot be definitive as to the location of the originating mint of its coins; butall are in virtually unworn state, and it seems likely that they, too, were issued somewherein Cilicia, perhaps near or at Tarsus itself. The available evidence, in short, indicates thatthe Brussels tetradrachm, no. 7, was struck at a Cilician mint.

The Portraits

The double portrait tetradrachms ofAntiochus and Philip are among the last of a small

group ofsuch issues struck by the Seleucids. They are unusual in that they show two reign-

9 Bellinger, 92, notes Babelon's early misreading of the letters of the Group I coins which led thelatter to suggest that they might have been struck in Sepphoris-Diocaesarea in Palestine.

10 Tarsus: WSM (reprinted 1977, with reattributions by O. Morkholm, iii-ix) 1289-90 (SeleucusI); 1308 and 1309 (Antiochus II), and 1315 (Seleucus II); CSE 463-4 (Antiochus III). Uncertainmint in Cilicia: WSM 1431-3 («Sardes-Antiochus Hierax», reattributed to Antiochus III in CSEp. 44). Seleucia on the Calycadnus: A. Houghton, The royal mint of Seleucia on the Calycadnus,Essays in Honor of Colin Kraay and Otto Merkholm (forthcoming).

" CSE 527 (Soli); 551 (uncertain mint in Cilicia).12 See CSE 498-9; 501. The tetradrachm ofAntiochus IX: G. Hirsch sale 141, 1984, 376.13 For example Naville 10, 1925, 1526, noted by Bellinger, 93, who assigns this coin the same

mint as the Group I double portrait issues on the basis of style. Other examples of the N< series in¬

clude G Le Rider and H. Seyrig, Objets de la collection Louis de Clercq, RN 1967, p. 43, 259; CSE304; Hess-Leu 31, 1966, 525. A number ofdifferent engravers were involved in producing an exten¬sive issue of Philip's N( coins.

82

ing kings rather than the representations of queens and their sons or husbands, as is the

case with all other Seleucid double portrait coins14.

They are also the first coins to represent either king, and the earliest die of the series,

which is surely one of the finest portrait groups of the late Hellenistic period, was probablyengraved with reference to the subjects themselves (fig. 7 is a 2:1 enlargement of Al).Nevertheless, it would be an error to regard these coins to show likeness of the two kings in

any more than a general sense. They possess, certainly, a number of individualizing ele¬

ments: long, slightly hooked noses, small mouths and chins, and Antiochus' sideburnswhich initially fall to the line of the jaw, and which are later shown extending to the point ofthe chin itself(A3). Yet direct comparison of their obverses with the coins ofAntioch struck

by each king during their periods of individual rule at that city (Antiochus: 93 B.C.; Philip:c. 88-83 B.C.) reveals differences of profile, mouth and chin, which cannot be attributedonly to the passage of time to be due entirely to differences of artistic quality or style.

The Antiochene portraits of Antiochus, for example, have heavier features, withlonger noses, larger mouths, and ajaw which is almost prognathic (fig. 8)'s. Philip's earlycoins of Antioch show the king running to corpulence, with a hooked or blunt nose,rounded features and a jowl which has begun to sag (fig. 9)16, quite unlike the youth who

appears with his brother on their north Syrian coins. Within the context of their later An¬

tiochene issues, the portraits ofAntiochus and Philip on their joint coinage appear as re¬

juvenated images, perhaps not distant from the reality, but exhibiting as much the aspectof gods as they do ofmen. The resemblance may have been intended: the double portraitcoins recall the autonomous tetradrachms of Tripolis, on which the accolate busts of theDioscuri appear (fig. 10)". The latter coins circulated in the Syrian north at exactly the

time when the double portrait issues of Antiochus and Philip were being designed, and itis not unreasonable to believe that they served as models for the Seleucid series. There is

no evidence that either king was assimilated with any deity of the Greek pantheon, butthe visual metaphor of their idealizing portraits, twinned in the same manner as that ofthe Dioscuri on the coins of Tripolis, would have been fully convenient to their politicalgoals.

The master engraver of the Group I coins appears to have cut dies only at Beroea forAntiochus and Philip, and for Philip's first issue at the probably Cilician mint where theKK series was continued; no other coinage can be attributed to his hand '8.

14 G Le Rider, Lenfant-roi Antiochos et la reine Laodice, BCH 110, 1986, 415, lists the coinageswith portraits of Seleucid queens, most of which also show the features of their sons or husbands.The last such issue is a small bronze of Cleopatra Selene and her son, Antiochus XIII, whichA.R. Bellinger, Notes on some coins from Antioch in Syria, MN 5, 1952, 53-55, suggests was struckin 92 B.C., either at Antioch in the interval immediately after the death of Eusebes and before thearrival of Demetrius III, or at a north Syrian mint where Cleopatra had sought refuge from De¬

metrius. The fabric, relief and inscription of the bronze do not appear to be typically Antiochene,however, and I am inclined to Bellinger's second alternative.

15 Fig. 8: CSE 389.16 Fig. 9: Leu 38, 1986, 152 CSE 393). See also Newell, SMA, 436.17 Noted by J.-P. Six, L'ère de Tripolis, Ann. Soc. Num. Fr. 1886, p. 232; Babelon clxvii; Bel¬

linger 92; Fig. 10: Numismatic Fine Arts 18, 1987, 230.18 The tetradrachm of Philip (above, n. 13), Naville 10, 1925, 1526, is the only other example of

his work known to me.

83

Arthur HoughtonWashington, D.C. 20007

List of illustrations

1 Berlin.2 Paris. Babelon 1540.3 A. Spaer Coll. Jerusalem.4 W Wahler Coll. Palo Alto.5 New York. ANS.6 Brussels. De Hirsch 1728.7 Enlargement 2 : 1 of obverse of Fig. 1.

8 CSE 389.9 Leu 38, 1986, 152 CSE 393.

10 NFA 18, 1987, 230.

84

PLATE 12

ce %

%*s&"*J^>^YrW 7

**

A P

&s&v:^3»K \VW&Ì

'JB ^?Tfc= ^*^™3: !'^%1=

VN_.

V yL¦»•*.

¦v

¦» V

Arthur Houghton, The double portrait coins of Antiochus XI and Philip I